Phoenix, AZ:

Ryley Carlock & Applewhite A Professional Association

Ryley Carlock & Applewhite A Professional Association
  • Phoenix, AZ
  • Phoenix, AZ 85004-4417
  • Peer Reviews
    4.8/5.0 (107)
    Client Reviews
    80% Recommended (4)
  • Profile Visibility [ i ]
  • Update this Profile

Office Details

Office Size:
53
Year Established:
1948
Clients
REPRESENTATIVE CLIENTS: Arcadia Water Company; ATC/Phoenix Transit; Aztec Land & Cattle Company, Ltd.; Bank of America, N.A.; Banner Health System; Chevron Corp.; Chino Valley Irrigation District; Electrical District No. 7; Hospital District No. One, Maricopa County; Industrial Development Authority of the County of Pinal; Intel Corporation; Knight Transportation, Inc.; Maricopa County, Arizona Pollution Control Corporation; Maricopa Water District; Mutoh America, Inc.; Page Land & Cattle Co.; Phelps Dodge Corporation; Pulte Home Corporation; Roosevelt Water Conservation District; SunChase Holdings Company; Tucson Medical Center; Wells Fargo Bank, National Association; White Mountain Communities Special Health Care District.
State Bar Summary:

All Attorneys are Members of the State Bar of Arizona and Maricopa County Bar Association.

Areas of Practice (21)

Specific Areas of Practice for our Phoenix office:

  • Advertising Law
  • Business
  • Corporate and Securities
  • Creditor's Rights and Bankruptcy
  • Document Control Group
  • Employee Benefits
  • Estate Planning
  • Food and Drug Law
  • Intellectual Property
  • Labor and Employment
  • Lender Liability Defense Group
  • Lending
  • Litigation
  • Public Finance and Corporate Trust
  • Public Policy
  • Publishing
  • Real Estate
  • Restrictive Covenants and Trade Secrets
  • Taxation
  • Transportation
  • Water, Energy, Resources and Environmental Law

Peer Reviews

  • 4.8/5.0 (107 reviews)
  • Legal Knowledge

    4.8/5.0
  • Analytical Capability

    4.8/5.0
  • Judgment

    4.8/5.0
  • Communication

    4.8/5.0
  • Legal Experience

    4.8/5.0

See All 107 Reviews »


*Attorneys who only have peer reviews prior to April 15, 2008 are not displayed.

Client Reviews

  • 4.5/5.0 (5 reviews)
  • 80% (4 recommendations)
  • Communication

    4.5/5.0
  • Responsiveness

    4.4/5.0
  • Quality of Service

    4.5/5.0
  • Value for Money

    4.5/5.0
Disclaimer